Ukraine has become a geopolitical and strategic battleground upon which the West (US-EU-NATO) and Russia are struggling for influence.

But, underlying this conflict is the need to develop a viable
solution, one that would address both the short term and
long-term needs of the Ukrainian people and both Russia and the
West.

The deep political divisions within Ukraine, exacerbated in
recent months with the ouster of the Yanukovich government, will
require careful diplomacy and mediation in order to be resolved.

Additionally, the economic crisis afflicting the country – a
crisis which dates back to well before the February coup – will
equally require a multi-faceted and inclusive solution that
benefits all interested parties. Naturally, achieving these
high-minded goals will not be easy; however, they are necessary
in order to chart a course toward a prosperous and stable future
for Ukraine.

Political and economic troubles

To understand the scope of the problems facing Ukraine, one must
recognize the host of political and economic tensions that lie at
the heart of the conflict. First and foremost is the painful
economic reality of present day Ukraine. With staggering debts
that the country simply cannot repay, endemic and long-term
unemployment, massive corruption, and a host of other economic
woes, the country’s challenges would be daunting, even with
political stability. However, as is self-evident, there is
anything but political stability in the country. And so, it is
against this backdrop, that one must examine the situation.

Ukraine’s debt is one of the principal economic obstacles. In
terms of total debt, the country will require upwards of $65
billion (if not more) to survive the next two years. However, the
issue of sovereign debt is particularly worrisome. By the end of
2015, Ukrainian bond debt will have soared beyond $13 billion,
with a significant portion of that debt being owned by Russia.
Additionally, Ukraine’s staggering energy debts owed to Moscow
will complicate the matter even further. From this perspective
alone, there is an obvious need on the part of Ukraine to find a
resolution to the crisis that is amenable to Moscow, lest they
have their debts called in.

The billions that would be required to bail out Ukraine are
certainly not going to come from Russia, given Putin and his
government’s unwillingness to recognize the illegal government in
Kiev. Therefore, the only solution given current conditions would
be a massive US-EU-IMF bailout with all the usual strings
attached including subsidy cuts, the driving down of public
sector wages, privatization, and a whole raft of other painful
IMF conditions. Considering the already unstable political and
social situation in the country, and the East of Ukraine already
being distrustful of the new authorities in Kiev, such austerity
medicine could very well drive the rest of the country to a
Crimea scenario, where much of the population clamors for
secession and possible integration with Russia.

Unemployment is already a significant problem, despite the
official unemployment rate continuing to be low by European
standards. The sad reality is that many, especially in the West
of the country, are chronically unemployed and underemployed, and
are therefore not included in the statistics. Moreover, many
Ukrainians make their living in the informal economy, making them
invisible in the unemployment calculations. The stark difference
in economic conditions between the poor, agricultural West and
the relatively more affluent, industrial East and South, only
further exacerbates the political divide between the two.

The ascension to power of right wing fascist forces, many of
which identify very closely with Nazi ideology, is particularly
troubling. As elements such as Right Sector, Svoboda and UNA-UNSO
officially occupy key government posts, it will create further
rifts between their political base in the West, and regions in
the East and South who will correctly recognize these forces as
an existential threat, particularly to the ethnic and religious
minorities.

The outlawing of two of the largest and most influential
political parties, the Ukrainian Communist Party and Yanukovich’s
Party of Regions, has thoroughly alienated (and disenfranchised)
large segments of the population who, quite correctly, believe
that there is no political future for them in the “new
Ukraine” where the government is controlled by
“liberal” and fascist elements. How can these millions
of Ukrainians be won back into the political process?

The question of Constitutional reform is also a major issue that
must be addressed. One of the central demands of many of the
protesters was a return the Constitution of 2004 in order to curb
presidential powers and return more authority to the Ukrainian
Rada (Parliament). This was a key aspect of the February-21
agreement brokered by Poland, Germany, and France, and agreed to
by Yanukovich and Russia. However, with the collapse of order in
Kiev, and the abandonment of the agreement, the issue of
constitutional reform has taken a back seat.

Finally, the ethnic and religious minorities in Ukraine see
themselves, to a large extent, under assault from an intolerant
putsch government in Kiev that would like nothing more than to
marginalize them completely, if not force them out of the
country. The ideology of the fascist groups, which see Ukraine’s
multiethnic character as a negative rather than a positive asset,
must be reconciled with the political and social reality. Of
course, there can be no future in Ukraine for these ethnic and
religious groups, unless they are guaranteed protection from a
government they recognize as legitimate.

Solutions to the crisis?

Any comprehensive solution in Ukraine must address the issues of
territorial integrity, regional autonomy, economic stabilization
and development, and protection of political and civil rights.

After the referendum on March 16, Crimea has proclaimed
independence and moved to integration with the Russian
Federation. However, the political future of other eastern and
southern regions of Ukraine must be determined. It would seem
logical then that Russia, together with the EU and other
interested parties, would need to come to an agreement regarding
the territorial integrity of these regions. This would require
assurances from Russia regarding their non-intervention. On the
flip side, the Ukrainian government and its western allies would
need to provide guarantees of protection of ethnic Russians
throughout Ukraine, as well as other vital Russian interests in
the region.

A central plank in the February-21 agreement was constitutional
reform, and this will have to take place in earnest. In doing so,
a framework for a true democratic election, rather than a
legitimization of the illegal government currently in Kiev, will
need to be established. Using the 2004 Constitution as a
baseline, negotiations could take place, mediated by Russia and
European partners, wherein a new constitution built on
compromise, and guaranteeing the rights of minorities, increased
democratic participation, and other key factors could be written.
This would undoubtedly satisfy Moscow, as it would eliminate the
immediate need for any military presence.

Of course, any political settlement would need to contain
provisions for what course of action should be taken if the
rights of minorities are violated by the elected government. It
seems clear that some of the ultra-nationalist individuals and
parties will win seats in the Rada and in the new administration.
Given this eventuality, how will Russia and the international
community respond if they proceed to leverage government powers
in a discriminatory way against minorities? Of course, this is
one of the principal concerns for Moscow.

Moreover, the new Constitution would need to explicitly enumerate
the rights of political parties, including the recently outlawed
Communist Party and Party of Regions, in order to guarantee the
democratic rights of all Ukrainians. By doing so, Ukraine would
take a huge step toward true political progress and the
establishment of an authentic participatory democracy.

Additionally, economic solutions will play a major role in
negotiations. While the US, Europe, and the IMF continue to
discuss bailouts for Ukraine, there would need to be a
comprehensive package provided by both Russia and the West.
Russia could make concessions regarding the Ukrainian bonds they
recently purchased, as well as generous terms on the energy debts
Kiev has racked up. The billions Ukraine would save could then be
used to address the pressing fiscal crisis and fund much needed
economic development. In return, Ukraine would guarantee Russia’s
continued access to the energy delivery infrastructure and
Ukrainian export market – a sticking point for Moscow.

For this sort of progress to be made, there will need to be
concessions on all sides. The interests of the people of Ukraine,
all people of Ukraine, must be considered and made central in any
agreement. Of course, the US and its allies must deescalate their
rhetoric and punitive measures and threats of further sanctions
against Russia. Not only do such threats exacerbate an already
tense situation, they cannot possibly have a positive impact on
the crisis. Instead, they will merely harden Russia’s resolve,
forcing Moscow to take counter-measures which could be
devastating to an already fragile European and global economy.
Any solution must begin with a rapprochement, rather than
bellicose rhetoric.

What has taken place in Kiev cannot be undone. However, the
situation need not deteriorate further. A mutually beneficial
solution is entirely possible, so long as all sides are willing
to work toward that goal. Hopefully, for the future of Ukraine,
all the interested parties have long since realized this.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.